- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 13:15:36 -0600
- To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Cc: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi all, +1 If I had been around at the time, I too would have certainly voted for requiring explicit clickable mechanisms. Revisiting this in an extension spec WCAG.next is a good idea. Kindest Regards, Laura On 11/22/15, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote: > Andrew's response is my understanding of WCAG consensus which was in play > during the creation of the WCAG. Personally, I would have voted for forcing > the "click the label to select" paradigm ... but that was not the > consensus. If the title or other invisible label reports the visible label > in a programmatic way (today via the API), I believe this was the main > concern during the formation of the WCAG. > > I need to put aside my personal preferences in favour of being true to what > I know was the consensus of the time, which I respect.However, I would be > fine with revisiting this in an extension spec or even WCAG.next > > I think however, we could add a fail a missing of a visible label on focus > but that is a separate issue. > > Cheers, > > David MacDonald > > > > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* > > Tel: 613.235.4902 > > LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> > > www.Can-Adapt.com > > > > * Adapting the web to all users* > * Including those with disabilities* > > If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy > <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> > > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Detlev Fischer > <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de >> wrote: > >> I responded on Github.H ere is what I wrote: >> >> " >> I think that in cases where individual labels are used next to checkboxes >> or radio buttons, they constitute a part of the respective control. >> That's >> why I think it is fair to mandate an explicit association for those cases >> to aid the many users with motor impairments that find it hard to place a >> mouse click on the control itself. >> I would allow for exceptions only in cases where the design does not >> allow >> for sufficient space for individual visible labels, as in the case of >> checkboxes placed within tables. Here, the title attribute, aria-label >> attribute of some accessibility`supported programmatic association with >> table headers via aria-labelledby can be used. >> So like Adam, I think it fair to define a failure for cases where the >> label is adjacent to the control but authors have failed to make the >> connection programmatically determinable. >> " >> >> I'd add that the minimal requirement expressed in the proposed consensus >> focuses unduly on the needs of screen reader users for whom markup would >> work either way. From the perspective of the many visually impaired and >> motor-impaired users, having clickable visual labels is to something I >> would not be shy to mandate. It's very easily done natively and has been >> good practice for many years. >> >> >> On 21 Nov 2015, at 20:34, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> > https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/122#issuecomment-158676010 >> >> -- >> Detlev Fischer >> testkreis - das Accessibility-Team von feld.wald.wiese >> c/o feld.wald.wiese >> Thedestraße 2 >> 22767 Hamburg >> >> Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45 >> Fax +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5 >> >> http://www.testkreis.de >> Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Monday, 23 November 2015 19:16:11 UTC